Wait you're suggesting the pensioners have more than 1 property? Because that's an exception rather than a rule I'd have thought. If they do then I agree with you entirely they're not in a bad shape. However the 65+ I know only have 1 property more often than not worth less than 500k.
If that's all the money you have in the world, and you live another 20 years at least, that's a lot of worry to put on your shoulders. Especially if you still want to be able to host family and friends etc... and live a decent quality of life. Remember you're not receiving income other than pension - generally, of course some 65+ still work and so on.
I mean I'm not totally against your point, most older people are drawing down a pension and can survive / exist. But who wants to survive and exist when you've worked hard all your life. 60+ should be a time to enjoy life a bit more and having to worry about money again is a fairly exhausting thing to have to do. Furthermore, you will likely use some of your cash to support grandkids etc... at least that's what I plan on doing with some of my retirement plans. Travel, relax, and support my children and/or their children.
Read the stats. It is beyond dispute that statistically those beyond working age are wealthier than those within it. Even to the point they are earning more. Let that truly sink in. Those not directly contributing to economic production are benefitting from it more than those that are. That's insane and completely unsustainable. That's why we need exponential migration just to keep our economy going. That's why those working are now having to pay new and higher taxes. They're facing further punitive measures to support the poor decision making of the generations that are now better off than ever before.
These are the same people that have had two years of massive restrictions to protect those generations.
Additionally you say these people have worked hard all their life to afford x or y, the problem is they didn't pay enough in to get what they are receiving. That is the fundental problem.
Yours and my taxes aren't paying to support you or me. We're paying to prop up the pensions of the previous generations who did not pay enough. They often paid what was asked of them, yes, but it simply was not enough.
They reaped the benefits of taxes that were far lower than they should have been.
Another couple of points for you, other incomes do exist, there are both state and private pensions as well as returns on investments including dividends, interest payments and the direct sale of shares etc. These are taken in to account in the stats posted.
You are, like too many others, focused on a limited window of people in their 60s, the poorer ones. The rest of us are discussing the demographic as a whole vs the other demographics as a whole.
Iceland aren't just providing a discount for the poor, they're providing a discount for everyone based on just one discriminatory characteristic.
Also as someone has just said, they and their family moved to better their life due to economic pressures. That goes both ways. Move to a cheaper area. Move to a smaller house. Free up stored wealth.
I'll use myself as an example, I pay a decent wedge in to my mortgage which allows me to live in a nice big house in a nice area.
I could invest this money differently.
Does this give me a more of a right to continue living in the same home when I'm old vs someone who is putting their savings in to say bullion?